Bombing happens, then the first thing that will obviously happen? TERRORISTS. They'll blame terrorists! Somebody! If not, it doesn't matter. Somebody's going to get an excuse to prosecute somebody, just like the investigators using their powers granted from the USAPATRIOT Act.

Rosso Rose wrote:Bombing happens, then the first thing that will obviously happen? TERRORISTS. They'll blame terrorists! Somebody! If not, it doesn't matter. Somebody's going to get an excuse to prosecute somebody, just like the investigators using their powers granted from the USAPATRIOT Act.

"Suddenly Frodo noticed that a strange-looking weather-beaten man, sitting in the shadows near the wall, was also listening intently to the hobbit-talk. He had a tall tankard in front of him, and was smoking a long-stemmed pipe curiously carved. His legs were stretched out before him, showing high boots of supple leather that fitted him well, but had seen much wear and were now caked with mud. A travel-stained cloak of heavy dark-green cloth was drawn close about him, and in spite of the heat of the room he wore a hood that overshadowed his face; but the gleam of his eyes could be seen as he watched the hobbits."

The US still has a problem of only connecting terrorism with brown people that yell "Allahu Akbar!", mass shootings are acts of terrorism but because most of them are committed by fucked up white boys no one thinks of them as terrorism.

If there is such a thing as too soon, then the only acceptable time to joke about it is when every afflicted person is dead. Otherwise, you can invariably offend someone. I've been enjoying some of the jokes leaking out of 4chan.

Also Grey's right on the definition of terrorist. It's just that because of the U.S.'s involvement in the Middle East the word has become associated with people from there, but terrorism can be domestic or foreign - race or group affiliation is irrelevant to the definition.

More seriously though, in big public events like this they tend to have snipers posted. It might just be one. The biggest embarrassment out of all of this is how the security didn't matter despite the guard presence and surveillance.

For the sake of my school week, I'll speculate for a moment. Excuse me for this:

And yeah, no question Grey. What I want to know now, is whether or not this event was even political. If not, then what was the reason why the person did it.

To be honest though, I can't really say it was the work of a 'terrorist' because I don't believe there is an exact definition to what a 'terrorist' is; same thing with 'terrorism'. But psychologically affecting the people is still key for the most part. For some reason though, I'm believing this to be a homicide, but currently it's being treated as a terrorist attacks by the government.

But really, who can we rely? Too soon to say for me though. It makes me think that whoever did this may have been trying, like many others, make change through such extreme means. No big surprise here, it's been done before obviously. Just speculating. Overall, I think it's too soon to call it a terrorist act until it is confirmed that it actually is.

Coincidentally, hours before the bomb, my Criminal Law Professor who lives in Boston on most weekends and lives here during the week cancelled class via e-mail. This e-mail specified a sort of out of the ordinary assignment to make up for the lack of class. We were to skip the current chapter and write a short essay on the next chapter's subject.